<p>rj – Thanks for posting the link. Interesting to listen to them – although the only one I recognized was Navy’s. One other sounded vaguely familiar; it must have been Georgia Tech’s. Nope, I still didn’t recognize Michigan’s. Note: I never said I wouldn’t LIKE any others’ fight songs, just that most people probably don’t recognize other schools’ fight songs. Most of us think our school (the academics, location, sports team, even fight song) is the center of the universe. However, to most other people in the country, it isn’t. Michigan’s fight song is probably no more recognizable to the vast majority people in North Carolina than UNC’s is to Michigan residents. I guess Navy can claim superiority to both of us on that measure, because theirs is played very often in venues other than sports arenas.</p>
<p>As for strategy: I made it clear earlier that I was talking about the fans discussing strategy, not the sports themselves. I’m well aware that there is plenty of strategy in football; I never said there wasn’t. However, my experience around people watching football games vs. basketball games (on TV or in person) is this: Timeouts in football: Go to the bathroom, get a snack, comment that third quarter is taking forever. Timeouts in basketball: Comments on how X player has shot poorly from the outside since his game against Y school, how Z will ask for a timeout soon because he looks tired, and debates about whether and why Coach should switch from man-to-man to zone. I’ve heard men and women of all ages between 10 and 90 join in timeout discussions on whether Coach will take a timeout after the next possession and who will take the final shot, depending on whether the point margin is two or three.</p>
<p>This may be partly the nature of the fans (again, around here basketball has a far greater following), but it’s also the nature of the sports. Basketball is a “close” sport with little rest time, and it’s easy to see the players’ expression and body language. Football is distant, the players are obscured by gear, and it’s a game of mostly dead time with a few fast spurts. In my opinion, there are three factors that make a sport engaging: (1) a fast pace; (2) no requirement of extensive protective gear to play (in other words, you can see the players); and, to a lesser extent, (3) proximity of fans to the players (court or ice sports are usually “closer” than field sports, although not always). Basketball meets all three (even in a large arena TV cameras are close to the action). Football meets none. Two sports I particularly like, soccer and rugby (which some people say makes football look like a dinner party) fit (1) and (2). Hockey fits (1) and (3).</p>
<p>You undoubtedly would make a different list of what you think is engaging in a sport. Fair enough.</p>